Fear grips Raqqa

[cali]

This article is from a week ago, but I think it illustrates the reality of bombing a city of nearly a quarter of a million where the target is deeply entwined and embedded with the civilian population.

The city where the western hostages slain by the Islamic State (Isis) terror group were held is nervously preparing for an onslaught. Each night since Barack Obama said he would bomb Isis targets in Syria, residents of the eastern city of Raqqa – those who support the group and those who abhor it – have sat in fear waiting for the air strikes to begin.

Many believe that the city's civilians will pay the price of a campaign to root out Isis, which after controlling Raqqa for more than a year is now well embedded in its ramshackle neighbourhoods and entwined into much of its social fabric.

<snip>

"I believe most of the casualties will be civilian," said Abu Mohammed, 33, a shopkeeper. "The majority will be from Raqqa and very few from Isis. Many of our young men in the city have joined Isis either because of fear or because of the wages they give, which is $400 (£246) per month. This is a very good salary for us here."

Abu Mohammed said he had adapted to the group's hardline rule and saw Isis as a better option than the regime of Bashar al-Assad. "We are afraid that after the US air strikes, the regime will take control of the city. Assad is a criminal and his regime is brutal. We had bad experience with the Free Syria Army [FSA], they are corrupt and now we are getting used to Isis's Islamic rules. Day after day, they are getting better with people."

Abu Maya Al-Raqawi, 40, a media worker from the city, said: "Some people are already fleeing the city as they know that civilians are going to be the real victims for these air strikes. Raqqa will be completely destroyed. We all know that Isis are spreading themselves among civilians and they occupy the FSA and old regime headquarters, which are in civilian areas. People in Raqqa have to deal with two evils, Isis or Assad. Which one is better? I don't know the answer."

<snip>

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/15/syria-raqqa-fear-us-air-strikes-isis

I understand supporting this military intervention, although I do not, but the sober reality is that civilians will be killed in these bombings. Now that it's started, I hope like hell it's successful and roots out ISIS quickly, so that the people in Raqqa have a chance. Between the bombings and the killings by ISIS, they're living in hell. I want to add one more thing: Cheering this on, crowing about how McCain must be shitting his pants, is just mindless and sickening- and I've seen more than a few of those posts. This isn't about the President winning over his domestic detractors, it's about the lives of real people.

[Uncle Joe]

1. I do support the military intervention but I agree with your final paragraph,

Last edited Tue Sep 23, 2014, 05:42 PM - Edit history (1)

my hope is that once ISIS is defeated, a new coalition government for Syria will be formed, although I don't have anything to base this on yet.

The Syrian people deserve a better government.

Thanks for the thread, Eva.

[Android3.14]

2. "...have sat in fear waiting..."

Grab your family and just walk away.

[cali]

4. please tell me you're being ironic.

[Android3.14]

9. Why ironic?

The choice is clear. When you are standing on the tracks, the whistle is blowing, the ground is shaking and there is a dark form coming around the bend, you step off the tracks or you die.

I know it's a painful choice, and yes, in a perfect world no one should have to make it.

Regardless. If you think your family will die if you stay in a region, then you leave by any means possible, even on foot, until the danger blows over or you start new in another place.

[cali]

10. walk away to where?

and for many people, it's just not an option.

[Android3.14]

11. Where the bombing isn't going to happen

Out of town, down the road, in the hills, the next town, wherever. As far as leaving not being an option for many, I disagree. Perhaps it isn't an option for some. Unless someone is threatening you with death, or you are hopelessly immobilized, leaving is merely an unfortunate choice between certain death and the uncertainty of the chaotic world.

[cali]

13. It's not an option for the elderly, the infirm. It's dangerous- perhaps as dangerous as staying

and no, it's not a choice between certain death and the uncertainty of a the chaotic world.

Furthermore, internally displaced persons and refugees are a huge problem in the region, in and of itself.

[Android3.14]

15. No doubt

Like I said, for those who are immobile, there are other issues.

I am not trying to minimize their plight. I guess the thing I'm trying to say is that, for most people, simply sitting in fear and waiting for bombs to drop is not the only option.

I recognize that refugees are a problem, but that wouldn't stop me from grabbing my family and high tailing it for the hills if the zombie apocalypse was coming our way.

[Violet_Crumble]

3. I so agree with yr last paragraph, Cali...

I think I would have supported a military intervention if it was done as a UN thing, and not a US thing.

[Ligyron]

6. There's five Arab nation actively involved apparently

so there's that.

The President is addressing the UN later today, no doubt in an effort to build an even bigger coalition, but a lot of the nations that join in will probably be Judeo-Christian types which doesn't exactly play well to the local populations involved. Crusaders and all...

[cali]

5. kick

[seveneyes]

7. "getting used to Isis's Islamic rules"

Fuck that shit. The tens of thousands of citizens should rise up and destroy every one of the shithead ISIL filth.

Why the fuck do these people allow a small band of murderous thugs to control their towns?

[cali]

8. why? a) not that small. b) well armed, ruthless fighters

this is like asking why the jews didn't fight back and just "let" themselves be slaughtered.

[karynnj]

16. Cali, the Jews did not join the Nazis

Reread the article you posted. The man quoted spoke of civilians vs ISIL - but he then seems to not include as ISIL the local people who joined because the pay is good. He also speaks of not liking Assad or the FSA - and seemed to say that so far, he is fine with ISIL.

In any story - fiction or non fiction - you need to consider the competence and impartiality of the narrator. If this were fiction, a critical reader would from these clues above not treat the narrator as a competent impartial narrator.

Where he is sympathetic is that it is always true that the country bombed will include many living normal lives who did nothing to deserve the calamity that they now face.

[cali]

17. I never said anything like that.

Look, people just want to go on living as best they can. And if you read the article, you read quotes from people unlike that shopkeeper. Where is it claimed that this man is an "impartial narrator"? Actually, your sentence regarding impartial narrators makes little sense- and I don't think it's just that it's a confusing, poorly crafted sentence. There are several interviews, in the article, of residents of Raqqa. They are not presented as "impartial narrators".

If you're aware of the situation in Raqqa, and what life has been like for its residents since ISIS seized control of the city, you know that any resistance is met with brutality. It's been particularly difficult for shopkeepers. It may not be courageous to just go along ISIS, but it's about survival so it is understandable.

[karynnj]

18. You did make that comparison - as to why they can't fight

My point in what you think is a poorly crafted sentence is that what he says does not seem to be something that can be taken at face value. What I am saying is that the resident's comments on Assad, FSA or ISIS are not to be trusted. Nor are they totally accurate on who is a "civilian" and who is in "ISIS" - as they include anyone from their town whether they work for ISIS or not.

Given the brutality of ISIS and the fact that they are firmly in charge, they have no good alternative. Either forces attack ISIS and many of them will be killed in the cross fire or ISIS continues as their brutal rulers.

[cali]

19. No, I didn't.

and again huh? What does this even mean? "My point in what you think is a poorly crafted sentence is that what he says does not seem to be something that can be taken at face value."

What do you mean by asserting that his "comments... are not to be trusted"? In what respect?

[marmar]

12. K/R

[m-lekktor]

14. " This isn't about the President winning over his domestic detractors,

it's about the lives of real people" THANK YOU.